Orchestrate iterative visual style searches with branch prompts, decision graphs, feedback loops, and final direction selection.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Генерирует структурированный PRD (Product Requirements Document) с шаблонами под тип продукта (B2C / B2B / внутренний инструмент / платформа) — фон, цели, детальный дизайн фич, acceptance criteria в Given-When-Then, аналитика и 10-пунктовый чеклист качества. User-invoked only — do NOT auto-trigger. Triggers on /pm-prd, "сделай PRD", "напиши PRD", "продуктовые требования", "make a PRD", "write a PRD", "draft requirements doc".
インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。
Part of the Personal Corp framework — running a one-person business through AI agents. Generate a delivery-ready Product Requirements Document from a feature description. Branches by product type — B2C, B2B, internal tool, platform — with each type emphasizing different modules. Includes a 10-item quality self-check that runs after generation.
| Field | Required | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Feature description | yes | What the feature does and what problem it solves; one sentence minimum |
| Target user | no | Who it's for; inferred from the feature if not given |
| Business goals | no | Expected business metrics (DAU, conversion, revenue, etc.) |
| Product type | no | B2C / B2B / internal / platform; auto-detected if not given |
| Constraints | no | Tech limits, deadlines, resource limits |
| Depth | no | Outline (for review) / detailed (for development); default detailed |
If the user only says "write a PRD" with no feature, ask for the feature description. If they give feature + user + goals, go straight to generation.
| Product type | PRD emphasis | Key differentiators |
|---|---|---|
| B2C | UX flow, growth metrics, A/B test plan | Heavy on interaction, heavy on data, write user journeys |
| B2B | Permission model, multi-tenancy, SLA, integration APIs | Heavy on completeness, security, API contracts |
| Internal tool | Operational efficiency, integration with existing systems, training cost | Heavy on practicality, light on visuals |
| Platform | Multi-role interaction, supply-demand matching, ecosystem rules | Heavy on role separation, rules engine |
Auto-detection rules: mentions of "user / member / loyalty / marketplace" → B2C; "enterprise / SaaS / CRM / admin panel" → B2B; "internal / management system / ticketing" → internal tool; "platform / marketplace / two-sided" → platform.
B2B PRDs must additionally cover:
Platform PRDs must additionally cover:
Three-method feature decomposition:
For every feature module, fill:
Use this template. Comments next to each placeholder describe the fill logic.
# PRD: {feature name}
**Version:** v1.0
**Author:** {PM name, or [TBD]}
**Date:** {today}
**Status:** Draft
---
## 1. Background and Goals
### 1.1 Background
<!-- Answer three questions: why now? what happens if we don't? what changes if we do? -->
{problem state + user pain + why this is the right moment}
### 1.2 Target users
<!-- Use [role] + [trait] + [scenario]. Never write "all users". -->
| User role | Trait | Core need | Use scenario |
|---|---|---|---|
### 1.3 Business goals and success metrics
<!-- Each goal must be SMART — specific number + deadline. -->
| Goal | Metric | Target | Tracking method |
|---|---|---|---|
## 2. Requirement Overview
<!-- One paragraph, 30 words max, summarizing the core requirement. -->
## 3. Detailed Feature Design
### 3.1 {Module 1}
**Description:** {what it does}
**User story:** As a {role}, I want {action}, so that {value}
**Priority:** P0 (must launch) / P1 (strongly recommended) / P2 (nice-to-have)
**Business rules:**
1. {rule 1 — clear trigger condition + processing logic}
2. {rule 2}
**Interaction flow:**
<!-- Start at entry point, end at task completion, cover happy path + exception branches. -->
1. User enters from {entry}
2. {steps}
3. Success: {feedback}
4. Failure: {error message and handling}
**Exception handling:**
| Scenario | Handling | User-facing message |
|---|---|---|
(repeat format for each module)
## 4. Non-Functional Requirements
<!-- B2C → emphasize performance and experience; B2B → emphasize security and availability. -->
| Category | Requirement | Acceptance criterion |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | {e.g. page load time} | {e.g. < 2s} |
| Security | {e.g. data encryption} | {e.g. TLS 1.2+ in transit} |
| Compatibility | {browsers / devices} | {Chrome, Safari, mobile webview} |
## 5. Data Requirements (Analytics Events)
<!-- List every event to capture. Format: event name + trigger + attributes + purpose. -->
| Event | Trigger | Key attributes | Purpose |
|---|---|---|---|
## 6. Acceptance Criteria
<!-- At least 3 ACs per feature module, in Given-When-Then format. -->
| ID | Scenario | Given | When | Then |
|---|---|---|---|---|
## 7. Schedule
<!-- Break into design / dev / integration / launch. -->
| Phase | Estimate | Dependency | Risk |
|---|---|---|---|
## 8. Risks and Dependencies
| Risk | Probability | Impact | Mitigation |
|---|---|---|---|
## Appendix
- Related documents
- Competitor references
- Design files
Run this 10-point checklist after generating. Flag any failed item with a fix suggestion.
| # | Check | Pass criterion |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Background not vague | Answers "why do this?" not just "we need to do this" |
| 2 | Goals quantified | At least one numeric success metric |
| 3 | Personas concrete | No "all users" / "everyone" |
| 4 | Business rules exhaustive | No "etc.", "other cases", "and so on" |
| 5 | Exception flows covered | Every feature has ≥2 exception scenarios |
| 6 | Acceptance testable | Given-When-Then format used |
| 7 | Analytics complete | All core action paths have events |
| 8 | No tech implementation | PRD describes "what", not "how to build" |
| 9 | Priorities assigned | Every module tagged P0/P1/P2 |
| 10 | Schedule grounded | Estimate covers design + dev + test + integration |
| Anti-pattern | What it looks like | Fix |
|---|---|---|
| Gold-plating | 50 features in v1 | Split MVP / v1.1 / v2; v1 keeps 3-5 core features |
| Fake requirement | "Users might want…" with no data | Tag every requirement with source: feedback / analytics / competitor / hypothesis |
| Design overreach | PRD specifies button color, font size, layout | Describe info hierarchy and interaction logic only; visuals → designer |
| Tech overreach | PRD specifies Redis, MySQL, framework choice | Describe perf requirements (e.g. "<2s") only; implementation → engineering |
| Rule blackhole | "Per business rules" without listing them | Enumerate every rule's trigger, logic, edge values |
[TBD][needs input] on critical missing pieces/pm-user-stories — after PRD review, break features into developable User Stories/pm-competitive — run before PRD to gather competitor references/pm-prioritize — when multiple requirements compete, rank with RICE firstまだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。
概要と使いどころ
Orchestrate iterative visual style searches with branch prompts, decision graphs, feedback loops, and final direction selection.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Audits the agent rules in the current folder (AGENTS.md, nested AGENTS.md files) and the skill descriptions the agent sees at start, then reports what to cut, move or rewrite and edits only after the user says yes. Use on «аудит правил», «проверь AGENTS.md», «почему агент не слушается правил», «проверь скиллы».
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Робот агента Personal Corp. Агент делает себе голову робота из набора деталей, хранит её в штабе в stack/avatars.json и кладёт в штаб страницу avatar/robot.html, где робот стоит за партой своего штаба и вокруг видны отделы, без сервера и интернета. На уроке по ссылке входа с экрана урока робот входит в живой класс и горит маячком, пока агент работает. Триггеры /avatar, /avatar <ссылка входа>, сделай себе аватар, покажи своего робота, приди на урок.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use when choosing between engines or models for an agent pipeline and the answer must come from measurement on your own data, not from marketing pages: speech recognition for meeting recordings, the model that turns a transcript into notes, the critic model that checks it. Runs every variant in an isolated container, measures time, cost per hour of input (USD and RUB, with price source and date) and quality (WER/CER and course terms for ASR; code checks plus a judge of a different model for LLM steps), writes results.json/csv and one static analytics page. Triggers on "бенчмарк", "сравни движки", "сколько стоит час записи", "какую модель взять для пайплайна", "benchmark the pipeline", "compare ASR engines".
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use when user asks for Claude Code usage stats, weekly analytics, project activity summary, or wants to see what projects were worked on. Triggers on "аналитика", "статистика claude", "cc stats", "weekly report", "что делал"
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use when needing strategic project analysis from multiple independent expert perspectives. Triggers on business decisions, growth strategy, product direction, competitive analysis, or any situation where diverse C-level opinions reduce blind spots
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。